Marine traffic

Table S1. Summary of 2019 marine traffic within the lower Kitimat Fjord System, as reported by archival AIS data.
			Speed (kn)			Length (m)				Beam (m)				Draft (m)
Type	VIDs	Transits	mean	sd	max	mean	sd	min	max	mean	sd	min	max	mean	sd	min	max
Cargo ship	54	157	12.7	1.7	17.1	159	53	26	200	26	8	7	33	8.2	2.6	3.0	11.0
Cargo ship:DG,HS,MP(X)	1	2	11.9	0.7	13.7	67	0	67	67	13	0	13	13	5.0	0.0	5.0	5.0
Diving op.	1	4	7.8	0.7	10.0	10	0	10	10	4	0	4	4	0.5	0.0	0.5	0.5
Dredging or underwater op.	3	36	9.7	2.4	15.0	63	34	35	119	14	6	9	22	4.4	0.5	4.0	5.0
Fishing	308	829	8.4	3.2	32.2	20	9	6	100	6	2	1	20	1.5	1.2	0.4	10.0
HSC	3	8	13.0	8.1	28.6	25	13	7	35	7	3	3	10	2.6	1.7	0.4	4.0
Law enforcement	3	3	9.7	1.5	12.6	42	16	26	68	8	3	6	14	2.8	0.8	2.0	4.0
Local ship	2	10	12.4	6.5	26.5	13	4	10	18	4	0	4	5	0.6	0.2	0.5	0.9
Military op.	1	4	9.1	2.4	15.0	33	0	33	33	8	0	8	8	3.0	0.0	3.0	3.0
Other	22	78	8.6	2.4	24.9	37	22	6	76	9	5	2	20	3.3	1.9	0.3	6.0
Passenger ship	58	803	15.1	5.7	35.6	108	75	11	301	18	10	3	36	4.0	2.2	0.6	8.0
Passenger ship:DG,HS,MP(Y)	1	2	11.1	0.4	11.8	64	0	64	64	12	0	12	12	3.0	0.0	3.0	3.0
Pilot	2	6	19.9	3.1	25.8	19	1	17	20	4	1	3	5	1.0	0.0	1.0	1.0
Pleasure Craft	275	1213	8.2	3.7	37.5	20	16	7	154	6	3	1	18	1.1	1.0	0.4	9.0
Port tender	1	2	7.4	1.1	8.8	26	0	26	26	8	0	8	8	8.0	0.0	8.0	8.0
Sailing	117	426	6.0	1.3	12.6	14	4	8	35	4	1	1	8	0.7	0.3	0.4	3.0
Search/rescue	14	193	10.3	4.0	39.2	52	15	7	83	11	3	2	17	4.6	1.0	0.4	6.0
Tanker	2	7	12.1	0.8	13.9	141	5	134	145	24	0	24	24	8.7	0.5	8.0	9.0
Towing	36	356	7.0	1.7	21.7	27	21	6	162	8	3	4	24	3.3	1.8	0.3	7.0
Towing(200/25)	42	382	8.8	1.6	13.7	32	6	12	41	10	2	2	12	4.7	1.4	1.7	7.0
Tug	62	873	7.4	1.8	13.9	27	28	11	178	8	3	4	22	3.1	1.8	0.6	6.0

Table S2. AIS traffic within the study area in 2019, grouped into 10 vessel classes.
				Speed (kn)			Length (m)				Beam (m)				Draft (m)
Vessel type	IDs	Transits	Transits/day	mean	sd	max	mean	sd	min	max	mean	sd	min	max	mean	sd	min	max
Cargo > 180m	38	94	0.26	13.1	1.4	17.1	193	7	180	200	31	1	28	33	9.5	1.7	6.0	11
Fishing < 60m	305	822	2.25	8.4	3.2	32.2	20	7	6	54	6	2	1	15	1.4	1.1	0.4	10
Other < 40m	70	565	1.55	11.5	7.2	39.2	23	9	6	40	6	2	2	10	1.8	1.4	0.3	8
Other > 100m	23	378	1.04	16.0	3.4	23.0	142	18	116	179	23	3	4	29	5.3	1.1	3.0	10
Other > 40m	46	340	0.93	9.5	2.6	16.6	57	14	42	100	13	3	7	22	3.9	1.3	2.0	6
Passenger > 180m	6	73	0.20	17.4	3.4	23.3	259	39	197	301	32	2	28	36	7.8	0.4	7.0	8
Pleasurecraft < 40m	263	1123	3.08	8.1	3.8	37.5	16	5	7	37	5	1	1	14	0.9	0.7	0.4	9
Sailing	117	426	1.17	6.0	1.3	12.6	14	4	8	35	4	1	1	8	0.7	0.3	0.4	3
Towing < 50m	74	738	2.02	8.0	1.9	21.7	29	9	6	41	9	2	2	12	4.1	1.7	0.3	7
Tug < 50m	61	835	2.29	7.3	1.8	13.9	22	8	11	41	7	2	4	12	3.0	1.8	0.6	6

Table S3. AIS traffic in 2019, restricted to prime fin whale habitat in Squally Channel, including Lewis Passage and north Campania Sound (W 129.4519 - 129.26239, N 53.069 - 53.3218)
type	vids	fixes	transits	transit_rate	dates_present	present_rate	speed_mn	speed_sd	speed_max	length_mn	length_sd	length_min	length_max	beam_mn	beam_sd	beam_min	beam_max	draft_mn	draft_sd	draft_min	draft_max
Cargo > 180m	4	82	4	0.01	4	0.01	12.4	1.6	14.6	187	8	180	200	31	1	30	32	10.2	0.9	9.0	11
Fishing < 60m	30	1889	75	0.21	56	0.15	8.2	4.3	32.2	17	6	10	37	6	2	4	12	1.2	0.9	0.5	6
Other < 40m	6	387	20	0.05	20	0.05	8.8	4.9	31.5	26	8	7	40	6	2	2	9	2.0	1.7	0.4	5
Other > 100m	5	172	9	0.02	9	0.02	10.4	2.0	13.5	157	19	134	178	18	8	4	29	6.6	1.6	4.0	9
Other > 40m	13	1018	59	0.16	57	0.16	9.5	2.4	15.0	55	14	42	98	13	3	9	22	3.9	1.4	2.0	6
Passenger > 180m	5	369	19	0.05	19	0.05	18.1	2.5	22.0	270	39	197	301	33	1	28	34	7.8	0.4	7.0	8
Pleasurecraft < 40m	70	2295	142	0.39	87	0.24	7.4	3.6	34.4	15	5	7	28	5	1	2	7	0.7	0.2	0.4	2
Sailing	17	766	35	0.10	32	0.09	5.6	1.4	9.0	15	5	8	32	4	2	2	8	0.8	0.4	0.4	3
Towing < 50m	14	803	40	0.11	39	0.11	9.2	1.4	11.8	34	4	26	41	10	2	6	12	5.2	1.2	1.7	6
Tug < 50m	17	1594	74	0.20	62	0.17	7.1	1.9	11.2	23	9	12	41	8	2	4	12	3.2	1.7	0.6	6

Figure S1. Length distributions of the ten vessel classes used to summarize marine traffic in 2019.

Figure S2. Speed distributions, in knots, of the ten vessel classes used to summarize marine traffic in 2019.

Figure S3.

Figure S4.

Table S4. Trends (historical and predicted) in AIS traffic, 2014 - 2030.
type	km_2014	km_2015	km_2018	km_2019	km_2030	scale_factor	rate_2019	rate_2030	pvalue
Cargo > 180m	0	0	0	9444	16943	1.79	0.15	0.08	0.30
Fishing < 60m	17165	16377	31949	45784	86437	1.89	0.12	0.06	0.05
Other < 40m	62201	87269	57399	18723	0	0.00	-0.48	-0.24	0.24
Other > 100m	25213	19011	27281	26166	33552	1.28	0.03	0.03	0.44
Other > 40m	27391	9943	23408	29184	37725	1.29	0.05	0.04	0.60
Passenger > 180m	6212	5489	10403	6168	11554	1.87	0.07	0.04	0.55
Pleasurecraft < 40m	0	0	56	51215	91952	1.80	0.15	0.08	0.30
Sailing	357	1553	12538	20934	50795	2.43	0.19	0.08	0.02
Towing < 50m	35311	15299	39409	42838	67175	1.57	0.08	0.05	0.38
Tug < 50m	30971	44685	46344	43301	61901	1.43	0.05	0.03	0.33

Figure S5.

Table S1.x. Dimensions of the LNG Canada fleet, adapted from TERMPOL (2015). Note that in our analyses, we reduced the max Shell length to 298m, and the beam was adjusted according to the original length:beam ratio.

Methods details

Line-transect surveys

Table S5. Effort and sighting details from line-trasect surveys within the Kitimat Fjord Surveys, 2013 - 2015.
	Effort		Fin whales		Humpback whales
Year	segments	km	total	valid	total	valid
2013	143	712.5204	8	6	68	38
2014	168	800.5337	18	17	134	130
2015	402	2083.1364	19	19	253	251

Figure S6. (a) Design-based line-transect survey effort throughout the central Gitga’at waters of the Kitimat Fjord System (each dot is the center of a 5-km segment of systematic effort), yielding detections of (b) fin whales and (c) humpback whales. Detection dot size reflects group size

Table S6. Best-fitting models of the detection functions for fin whales and humpback whales, based upon 2013-2015 line-transect surveys.
	Species	Model	Key function	Formula	C-vM p-value	\(\hat{P_a}\)	se(\(\hat{P_a}\))	\(\Delta\)AIC
1	Fin whale	1	Half-normal	~1	0.8405095	0.5500191	0.0742873	0.0000000
3		2	Half-normal	~1 + factor(year)	0.7815848	0.5231299	0.0742940	0.3047398
2		3	Half-normal	~1 + bft	0.8250065	0.5465154	0.0793721	1.5958236
31	Humpback whale	1	Half-normal	~1 + factor(year)	0.9652267	0.5204825	0.0213641	0.0000000
21		2	Half-normal	~1 + bft	0.9637787	0.5296131	0.0215150	9.0061244
11		3	Half-normal	~1	0.9430440	0.5364511	0.0213979	15.9211900

Figure S7. Detection functions.

Figure S8. Bathymetric characteristics of the study area, as summarized for the square-kilometer grid used in density surface modeling.

Fin whale dive tag analysis

Figure S9. Raw time- and depth-distributions of depth sensor readings for each of the 7 SPLASH-10 tag deployments.

Figure S10. Time distribution (hour of day, color-coded by daytime/nighttime) of depth samples from SPLASH10 tags.

Summary of SPLASH10 depth data used in fin whale depth distribution analysis.
id	deploy_ptt	start	stop	span	hours	n	n_day	n_night	frac_valid
1	132219-132219	2013-08-19 23:00:00	2013-08-24 20:58:45	117.97917	8.00000	384	336	48	0.07
2	132220-132220	2013-08-18 18:47:30	2013-08-28 19:57:30	241.16667	26.18750	1257	837	420	0.11
3	137684-137684	2014-08-16 00:15:00	2014-08-16 23:57:30	23.70833	23.72917	1139	835	304	1.00
4	137685-137685	2014-08-20 18:22:30	2014-09-04 21:58:45	363.60417	45.62500	2190	1720	470	0.13
5	137686-137686	2014-08-23 16:30:00	2014-09-02 13:57:30	237.45833	18.47917	887	792	95	0.08
6	142546-142546	2014-09-08 19:00:00	2014-09-28 23:58:45	484.97917	82.00000	3936	2468	1468	0.17
7	142547-142547	2014-09-14 00:00:00	2014-09-14 10:58:45	10.97917	4.00000	192	96	96	0.36

Figure S11. Daytime (left) and nighttime (right) depth distribution curves, representing the proportion of time spent above a given depth, for six SPLASH-10 deployments on fin whales (colored lines).

Collision & mortality analysis

Figure S12. Probabilities of collision (left) and mortality (right) as a function of ship speed (>180m length), adapted from Gende et al. (2011).

Potential Biological Removal

Fin whales – Canadian Pacific stock (Wright et al. 2022):

pbr(N = 2893, CV = 0.15) %>% cbind

##         .       
## PBR     15.70251
## Nmin    785.1253
## Rmax    0.08    
## Fr      0.5     
## Nmedian 2953.024

Fin whales – North Coast Sector (Wright et al. 2022):

pbr(N = 161, CV = 0.50)  %>% cbind

##         .       
## PBR     1.258035
## Nmin    62.90175
## Rmax    0.08    
## Fr      0.5     
## Nmedian 160.7847

Fin whales – coastal (Queen Charlotte, Hecate Strait) (Nichol et al 2017):

pbr(N = 405, CV = 0.6)  %>% cbind

##         .       
## PBR     2.74874 
## Nmin    137.437 
## Rmax    0.08    
## Fr      0.5     
## Nmedian 402.2371

Humpback whales – Canadian Pacific stock (Wright et al. 2022):

pbr(N = 7030, CV = 0.1)  %>% cbind

##         .       
## PBR     35.48395
## Nmin    1774.198
## Rmax    0.08    
## Fr      0.5     
## Nmedian 7093.933

Humpback whales – North Coast sector (Wright et al. 2022):

pbr(N = 1816, CV = 0.13)  %>% cbind

##         .       
## PBR     10.27211
## Nmin    513.6057
## Rmax    0.08    
## Fr      0.5     
## Nmedian 1826.804

Results details

Vessel traffic

Figure S13. Distribution of 2019 marine traffic parsed by waterway and time of day.

Figure S14. Monthly distribution of 2019 marine traffic, parsed by time of day.

Figure S15. Counts of AIS location fixes for 10 vessel types in 2019, displayed for each waterway in the study area separately.

Species distribution models

Best-fitting density surface models for fin whales and humpback whales for mid-June – early-September.
Species	Formula	Trunc. dist.	Family	Link function	Delta AIC	Deviance explained
Fin whale	(Lat x Lon) + seafloor depth + seafloor range	2.0 km	Tweedie	log	104	54%
Humpback whale	(Lat x Lon x DOY) + seafloor depth + seafloor range + year	2.7 km	Tweedie	log	14	51%

Table S7. Fin whale density (95% confidence interval) by waterway (whales per square km), , as estimated from the best-fitting density surface model. Confidence intervals are estimated using a bootstrap procedure.
Waterway	Season
Caamano	0.022 (0-0.126)
Campania	0.024 (0-0.148)
Estevan	0 (0-0)
McKay	0 (0-0)
Squally	0.031 (0-0.169)
Verney	0 (0-0)
Whale	0 (0-0)
Wright	0 (0-0)
Study area	0.014 (0-0.118)

Table S8. Humpback whale density (95% confidence interval) by waterway (whales per square km), , as estimated from the best-fitting density surface model. Confidence intervals are estimated using a bootstrap procedure.
Waterway	Season	June	July	August	September
Caamano	0.059 (0.012-0.153)	0.119 (0.006-0.74)	0.057 (0.006-0.113)	0.046 (0.005-0.094)	0.049 (0.013-0.139)
Campania	0.07 (0.012-0.139)	0.056 (0.001-0.131)	0.063 (0.01-0.158)	0.071 (0.007-0.186)	0.097 (0.015-0.249)
Estevan	0.037 (0.004-0.071)	0.119 (0.006-0.153)	0.021 (0.001-0.024)	0.046 (0.006-0.121)	0.047 (0.008-0.107)
McKay	0.049 (0.003-0.112)	0.007 (0.001-0.036)	0.02 (0.001-0.04)	0.068 (0-0.134)	0.102 (0.017-0.313)
Squally	0.11 (0.025-0.251)	0.132 (0.021-0.429)	0.041 (0.002-0.099)	0.161 (0.037-0.448)	0.102 (0.01-0.2)
Verney	0.072 (0.006-0.282)	0.006 (0-0.035)	0.029 (0.001-0.108)	0.085 (0.006-0.231)	0.154 (0.004-0.786)
Whale	0.113 (0.023-0.298)	0.03 (0.003-0.111)	0.015 (0.002-0.048)	0.196 (0.026-0.502)	0.165 (0.034-0.512)
Wright	0.117 (0.007-0.308)	0.033 (0-0.139)	0.081 (0.01-0.204)	0.164 (0.034-0.566)	0.154 (0-0.425)
Study area	0.079 (0.01-0.223)	0.083 (0.001-0.417)	0.046 (0.002-0.125)	0.1 (0.007-0.359)	0.095 (0.01-0.32)

Seasonality

Table S9. Summary of GAM of seasonal fin whale abundance. This model was used to scale the June-September density estimate.
Family	Formula	edf	P-value of coefficient	Deviance explained
Negative binomial	count ~ s(doy, k=5) + offset(log(minutes))	2.803	7e-04	26%

Close-encounter rates

Close encounter rate
	Fin whales					Humpback whales
Vessel type	Median	Mean	SD	LCI	UCI	Median	Mean	SD	LCI	UCI	FW - HW
Cargo > 180m	0.06	0.061	0.024	0.02	0.11	0.05	0.049	0.022	0.01	0.09	0.01
Cedar LNG tanker in-heel	0.08	0.086	0.030	0.04	0.15	0.07	0.070	0.027	0.03	0.12	0.01
Cedar LNG tanker in-product	0.08	0.086	0.031	0.03	0.14	0.07	0.070	0.025	0.02	0.12	0.01
Cedar LNG tug in-heel	0.02	0.024	0.015	0.00	0.06	0.01	0.016	0.012	0.00	0.04	0.01
Cedar LNG tug in-product	0.02	0.023	0.016	0.00	0.06	0.01	0.016	0.012	0.00	0.04	0.01
Fishing < 60m	0.02	0.023	0.015	0.00	0.05	0.01	0.016	0.013	0.00	0.05	0.01
LNG Canada tanker in-heel	0.09	0.087	0.026	0.04	0.14	0.07	0.071	0.025	0.03	0.12	0.02
LNG Canada tanker in-product	0.08	0.085	0.027	0.04	0.14	0.07	0.070	0.027	0.02	0.13	0.01
LNG Canada tug in-heel	0.02	0.024	0.014	0.00	0.06	0.01	0.015	0.012	0.00	0.04	0.01
LNG Canada tug in-product	0.02	0.022	0.015	0.00	0.05	0.01	0.017	0.013	0.00	0.05	0.01
Other < 40m	0.02	0.021	0.014	0.00	0.05	0.01	0.017	0.013	0.00	0.05	0.01
Other > 100m	0.04	0.046	0.021	0.01	0.09	0.04	0.038	0.018	0.01	0.07	0.00
Other > 40m	0.03	0.033	0.017	0.01	0.07	0.02	0.025	0.015	0.00	0.06	0.01
Passenger > 180m	0.06	0.061	0.023	0.02	0.11	0.05	0.052	0.023	0.01	0.10	0.01
Pleasurecraft < 40m	0.02	0.019	0.014	0.00	0.05	0.01	0.013	0.011	0.00	0.04	0.01
Sailing	0.02	0.019	0.013	0.00	0.05	0.01	0.014	0.012	0.00	0.04	0.01
Towing < 50m	0.02	0.024	0.015	0.00	0.05	0.02	0.019	0.013	0.00	0.05	0.00
Tug < 50m	0.02	0.024	0.015	0.00	0.06	0.02	0.019	0.013	0.00	0.05	0.00

Figure S16. caption

Depth distribution

Table S10. Proportion of time fin whale spend above various depth cutoffs (1m, 2m, …, 30m), estimated for day and night separately based upon the mean and SD from six SPLASH-10 tag deployments.
	Daytime		Nighttime
Depth (m)	Mean	SD	Mean	SD
1	8.7%	4.8%	8.3%	7.5%
2	14.4%	7.2%	18.1%	13.1%
5	26%	5.2%	41.1%	16.1%
10	37.1%	7.1%	59.2%	15.3%
15	47.5%	8%	72.1%	17%
20	55.4%	6.9%	82%	15.6%
25	60.9%	6.6%	85.3%	16%
30	63.3%	6.4%	89.5%	12.9%

Figure S17. Daytime (pink) and nighttime (teal) depth distribution curves for fin whale in and near the Kitimat Fjord System, representing the average proportion of time spent above a given depth across all tag deployments (n=6 in 2013 and 2014). Points on the left side of the plot represent the SD at each depth.

Interaction rates

Table S11. Interaction rates.
		Fin whales				Humpback whales
Traffic scheme	Event	Mean	Median	95% CI	80% Conf.	Mean	Median	95% CI	80% Conf.
AIS 2019	Cooccurrence	509.21	509.0	471 - 549	488	5961.53	5962	5805 - 6113	5884.0
	Close encounter	13.59	13.5	8 - 19	10	117.35	117	100 - 137	108.0
	Strike-zone event	3.06	3.0	1 - 6	2	25.50	25	18 - 34	21.0
	(1.5x draft)	3.00	3.0	0 - 6	2	25.50	26	17 - 34	21.0
AIS 2030	Cooccurrence	855.99	856.0	802 - 912	827	9419.83	9413	9220 - 9646	9312.8
	Close encounter	22.79	22.5	16 - 31	19	183.13	183	161 - 205	171.0
	Strike-zone event	4.89	5.0	2 - 9	3	39.23	39	30 - 49	34.0
	(1.5x draft)	5.03	5.0	2 - 9	3	38.81	39	29 - 49	34.0
LNG Canada	Cooccurrence	137.66	137.0	116 - 161	127	1711.94	1711	1636 - 1786	1673.0
	Close encounter	7.20	7.0	3 - 12	5	73.08	73	59 - 88	66.0
	Strike-zone event	3.01	3.0	0 - 6	1	30.75	30	22 - 40	26.0
	(1.5x draft)	3.01	3.0	0 - 6	1	30.66	31	22 - 40	25.0
Cedar LNG	Cooccurrence	19.40	19.0	13 - 27	16	236.24	237	211 - 260	223.0
	Close encounter	1.06	1.0	0 - 3	0	10.02	10	5 - 15	7.0
	Strike-zone event	0.44	0.0	0 - 2	0	4.48	4	1 - 8	3.0
	(1.5x draft)	0.45	0.0	0 - 2	0	4.42	4	1 - 8	3.0
Total 2030	Cooccurrence	1013.05	1013.5	954 - 1074	981	11368.01	11360	11153 - 11599	11260.0
	Close encounter	31.05	31.0	23 - 40	26	266.24	266	239 - 294	252.0
	Strike-zone event	8.34	8.0	4 - 13	6	74.46	74	61 - 89	67.0
	(1.5x draft)	8.50	8.0	4 - 14	6	73.90	74	60 - 89	66.0

Figure S18. caption

Figure S19. caption

Figure S20. caption

Figure S21. caption

Figure S22. caption

Figure S23. caption

Shares of interaction risk by vessel

Table S12. Share of interactions risk attributable to each vessel type, in 2019 and in 2030.
		Fin whales			Humpback whales
Year	Vessel	Cooccurrence	Close encounter	Strike-zone event	Cooccurrence	Close encounter	Strike-zone event
2019	Cargo > 180m	2	5	11	2	5	11
	Fishing < 60m	13	11	6	16	12	7
	Other < 40m	3	3	1	8	6	3
	Other > 100m	3	5	7	7	14	21
	Other > 40m	11	12	11	10	12	13
	Passenger > 180m	7	17	27	3	8	13
	Pleasurecraft < 40m	27	18	7	23	15	6
	Sailing	11	8	3	10	8	3
	Towing < 50m	14	12	16	9	9	12
	Tug < 50m	10	8	11	11	10	12
2030	Cargo > 180m	2	4	6	2	4	7
	Cedar LNG tanker in-heel	0	1	2	1	1	3
	Cedar LNG tanker in-product	0	1	2	1	2	3
	Cedar LNG tug in-heel	0	0	0	1	0	0
	Cedar LNG tug in-product	0	0	0	1	0	0
	Fishing < 60m	12	9	4	16	10	5
	LNG Canada tanker in-heel	3	9	17	4	11	19
	LNG Canada tanker in-product	3	9	15	4	11	19
	LNG Canada tug in-heel	3	3	2	4	2	2
	LNG Canada tug in-product	3	2	2	4	3	2
	Other < 40m	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Other > 100m	2	3	3	5	8	9
	Other > 40m	7	7	6	7	7	6
	Passenger > 180m	7	13	18	3	6	8
	Pleasurecraft < 40m	24	15	4	22	12	4
	Sailing	13	9	3	13	8	2
	Towing < 50m	11	9	9	8	6	6
	Tug < 50m	7	5	6	8	7	5

Figure S24. caption

Figure S25. caption

Shares of interaction risk by waterway

Table S13. Share of interactions risk attributable to each waterway, in 2019 and in 2030.
		Fin whales			Humpback whales
Year	Channel	Cooccurrence	Close encounter	Strike-zone event	Cooccurrence	Close encounter	Strike-zone event
2019	Caamano	61	60	63	14	15	17
	Estevan	0	0	0	4	5	5
	Campania	15	16	17	4	5	6
	Squally	24	23	20	8	7	6
	Whale	0	0	0	39	38	37
	Wright	0	0	0	12	12	13
	McKay	0	0	0	16	15	14
	Verney	0	0	0	4	3	2
2030	Caamano	51	44	37	12	11	9
	Estevan	0	0	0	6	7	8
	Campania	13	12	10	4	4	3
	Squally	35	43	52	11	13	16
	Whale	1	1	1	43	46	49
	Wright	0	0	0	9	8	7
	McKay	0	0	0	12	10	7
	Verney	0	0	0	3	2	1

Figure S26. caption

Figure S27. caption

Shares of interaction risk by month

Table S14. Share of interactions risk attributable to each month, in 2019 and in 2030.
		Fin whales			Humpback whales
Year	Month	Cooccurrence	Close encounter	Strike-zone event	Cooccurrence	Close encounter	Strike-zone event
2019	Jan	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Feb	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Mar	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Apr	0	0	0	0	0	0
	May	5	6	7	3	3	4
	Jun	14	15	15	16	16	17
	Jul	21	21	19	10	10	9
	Aug	37	34	31	34	32	30
	Sep	16	17	19	32	33	33
	Oct	5	6	6	4	5	6
	Nov	1	1	1	1	1	1
	Dec	0	0	0	0	0	0
2030	Jan	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Feb	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Mar	0	0	0	0	0	0
	Apr	0	1	1	0	0	0
	May	5	5	7	3	3	3
	Jun	14	15	15	16	16	16
	Jul	21	21	22	11	11	11
	Aug	37	33	27	37	35	35
	Sep	16	17	20	28	28	28
	Oct	6	6	7	4	5	6
	Nov	1	1	1	1	1	1
	Dec	0	0	0	0	0	0

Figure S28. caption

Figure S29. caption

Shares of interaction risk by diel period

Table S15. Share of interactions risk attributable to each diel period, in 2019 and in 2030.
		Fin whales			Humpback whales
Year	Diel period	Cooccurrence	Close encounter	Strike-zone event	Cooccurrence	Close encounter	Strike-zone event
2019	day	89	87	78	83	79	66
	night	11	13	22	17	21	34
2030	day	87	84	71	82	78	65
	night	13	16	29	18	22	35

Figure S30. caption

Figure S31. caption

Collisions & mortalities

Table S16. Predicted rates of collision and mortality.
			Fin whales				Humpback whales
Traffic scheme	Event	Avoidance	Mean	Median	95% CI	80% Conf.	Mean	Median	95% CI	80% Conf.
AIS 2019	Collision	0.55	0.48	0	0 - 2	0	2.74	3	0 - 5	1
		~ Speed	0.77	1	0 - 2	0	3.56	3	1 - 7	2
		None	1.13	1	0 - 3	0	6.02	6	2 - 10	4
	Mortality	0.55	0.47	0	0 - 2	0	2.56	2	0 - 5	1
		~ Speed	0.74	1	0 - 2	0	3.36	3	1 - 7	2
		None	1.08	1	0 - 3	0	5.63	5	2 - 10	4
AIS 2030	Collision	0.55	0.86	1	0 - 3	0	5.07	5	2 - 9	3
		~ Speed	1.33	1	0 - 3	0	6.78	7	3 - 11	5
		None	1.98	2	0 - 4	1	11.24	11	6 - 17	8
	Mortality	0.55	0.82	1	0 - 2	0	4.75	5	2 - 8	3
		~ Speed	1.29	1	0 - 3	0	6.42	6	3 - 11	4
		None	1.90	2	0 - 4	1	10.54	10	6 - 16	8
LNG Canada	Collision	0.55	1.24	1	0 - 3	0	12.55	12	7 - 19	10
		~ Speed	1.18	1	0 - 3	0	11.94	12	7 - 18	9
		None	2.71	3	0 - 6	1	27.96	28	20 - 37	23
	Mortality	0.55	1.06	1	0 - 3	0	10.72	11	6 - 16	8
		~ Speed	1.00	1	0 - 3	0	10.32	10	5 - 16	8
		None	2.29	2	0 - 5	1	23.78	24	16 - 32	19
Cedar LNG	Collision	0.55	0.17	0	0 - 1	0	1.85	2	0 - 4	1
		~ Speed	0.17	0	0 - 1	0	1.63	1	0 - 4	0
		None	0.41	0	0 - 2	0	4.04	4	1 - 8	2
	Mortality	0.55	0.15	0	0 - 1	0	1.56	1	0 - 4	0
		~ Speed	0.15	0	0 - 1	0	1.38	1	0 - 3	0
		None	0.35	0	0 - 2	0	3.37	3	1 - 7	2
Total 2030	Collision	0.55	2.27	2	0 - 5	1	19.47	19	12 - 27	16
		~ Speed	2.68	3	0 - 6	1	20.36	20	13 - 28	16
		None	5.10	5	2 - 9	3	43.24	43	32 - 55	37
	Mortality	0.55	2.03	2	0 - 4	1	17.02	17	11 - 24	13
		~ Speed	2.44	2	0 - 5	1	18.12	18	11 - 26	15
		None	4.54	4	1 - 8	3	37.68	38	28 - 48	32

Figure S32. caption

Figure S33. caption

Table S17. Share of collision and mortality risk attributable to each vessel type, in 2019 and in 2030.
	Fin whales				Humpback whales
	Collision		Mortality		Collision		Mortality
Vessel	2019	2030	2019	2030	2019	2030	2019	2030
Cargo > 180m	26	11	22	11	41	14	39	14
Passenger > 180m	74	39	78	41	59	20	61	22
LNG Canada tanker in-heel		24		23		30		30
LNG Canada tanker in-product		20		19		29		27
Cedar LNG tanker in-heel		3		3		4		3
Cedar LNG tanker in-product		4		3		4		4

Figure S34. caption

Table S18. Share of collision and mortality risk attributable to each waterway, in 2019 and in 2030.
	Fin whales				Humpback whales
	Collision		Mortality		Collision		Mortality
Waterway	2019	2030	2019	2030	2019	2030	2019	2030
Caamano	59	29	61	30	26	8	27	9
Estevan	0	0	0	0	8	10	7	9
Campania	25	11	23	13	15	4	13	5
Squally	15	59	15	56	7	20	8	20
Whale	0	1	1	1	26	50	26	50
Wright	0	0	0	0	18	7	17	6
McKay	0	0	0	0	1	1	1	1
Verney	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

Figure S35. caption

Table S19. Share of collision and mortality risk attributable to each month, in 2019 and in 2030.
	Fin whales				Humpback whales
	Collision		Mortality		Collision		Mortality
Month	2019	2030	2019	2030	2019	2030	2019	2030
1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
3	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
4	0	1	1	1	0	0	0	0
5	4	5	5	5	5	3	4	3
6	21	18	23	18	23	17	24	18
7	19	21	16	19	9	11	10	11
8	30	27	27	29	27	36	26	36
9	21	19	23	21	29	26	29	25
10	3	7	3	7	5	5	5	5
11	0	1	1	1	1	1	1	1
12	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

Figure S36. caption

Table S20. Share of collision and mortality risk attributable to each diel period, in 2019 and in 2030.
	Fin whales				Humpback whales
	Collision		Mortality		Collision		Mortality
Diel period	2019	2030	2019	2030	2019	2030	2019	2030
day	80	73	83	72	69	65	71	66
night	20	27	17	28	31	35	29	34

Figure S37. caption

Chances of certain outcome severities

Table S21. Chances of various impact severities for fin whales and humpback whales, due to present-day AIS-transmitting traffic (represented by 2019 traffic), projected AIS-transmitting traffic in 2030, projected LNG Canada traffic, projected Cedar LNG traffic, then all traffic in 2030 (previous categories combined).
		AIS 2019		AIS 2030		LNG Canada		Cedar LNG		All traffic 2030
Species	Chances (%) of…	Coll.	Mort.	Coll.	Mort.	Coll.	Mort.	Coll.	Mort.	Coll.	Mort.
Fin whale	Zero	33.1	37.7	14.0	19.1	28.5	33.7	83.4	85.6	3.8	6.0
	At least 1	66.9	62.3	86.0	80.9	71.5	66.3	16.6	14.4	96.2	94.0
	At least 2	32.9	26.6	55.0	45.8	34.8	27.1	1.3	0.9	83.7	76.0
	At least 3	11.1	7.5	27.1	20.9	13.8	9.3	0.0	0.0	65.2	52.8
	At least 4	3.4	1.6	11.7	8.5	4.8	2.1	0.0	0.0	41.9	30.9
	At least 5	0.6	0.2	5.2	2.6	0.9	0.4	0.0	0.0	24.2	16.5
Humpback whale	Zero	0.0	0.1	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	18.9	25.2	0.0	0.0
	At least 1	100.0	99.9	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	81.1	74.8	100.0	100.0
	At least 2	99.9	99.8	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	52.9	43.1	100.0	100.0
	At least 3	99.5	98.0	100.0	99.9	100.0	99.8	25.2	18.4	100.0	100.0
	At least 4	98.2	94.9	100.0	99.8	100.0	99.2	10.5	5.9	100.0	100.0
	At least 5	95.6	90.5	99.8	99.6	99.3	97.7	3.3	1.9	100.0	100.0

Table S22. Chances of various impact severities for fin whales and humpback whales, similar to above, now described as the chances of experiencing *no more than* the stated number of events.
		AIS 2019		AIS 2030		Cedar LNG		LNG Canada		All traffic 2030
Species	Chances (%) of…	Coll.	Mort.	Coll.	Mort.	Coll.	Mort.	Coll.	Mort.	Coll.	Mort.
Fin whale	Zero	33.1	37.7	14.0	19.1	83.4	85.6	28.5	33.7	3.8	6.0
	Max of 1	67.1	73.4	45.0	54.2	98.7	99.1	65.2	72.9	16.3	24.0
	Max of 2	88.9	92.5	72.9	79.1	100.0	100.0	86.2	90.7	34.8	47.2
	Max of 3	96.6	98.4	88.3	91.5	100.0	100.0	95.2	97.9	58.1	69.1
	Max of 4	99.4	99.8	94.8	97.4	100.0	100.0	99.1	99.6	75.8	83.5
	Max of 5	99.7	99.8	98.3	99.3	100.0	100.0	99.6	99.8	87.6	93.1
Humpback whale	Zero	0.0	0.1	0.0	0.0	18.9	25.2	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0
	Max of 1	0.1	0.2	0.0	0.0	47.1	56.9	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0
	Max of 2	0.5	2.0	0.0	0.1	74.8	81.6	0.0	0.2	0.0	0.0
	Max of 3	1.8	5.1	0.0	0.2	89.5	94.1	0.0	0.8	0.0	0.0
	Max of 4	4.4	9.5	0.2	0.4	96.7	98.1	0.7	2.3	0.0	0.0
	Max of 5	8.9	18.9	0.4	1.3	98.9	99.5	1.0	4.4	0.0	0.0

Validation

Fin whales

## Melting outcomes & prepping the posterior ...
## Determining the probability of your observations ...
## Likelihood of your observation, assuming perfect detection = 0.001
## Finding the strike detection rate (SDR) that would make your observations plausible ...
## preparing L ~ SDR plot ...
## --- SDR needed for P(Observation) of 0.05 = 0.495
## --- SDR needed for P(Observation) of 0.10 = 0.355
## --- SDR needed for P(Observation) of 0.20 = 0.25
## --- SDR needed for P(Observation) of 0.55 = 0.095

Figure S38. caption

Humpback whales

## Melting outcomes & prepping the posterior ...
## Determining the probability of your observations ...
## Likelihood of your observation, assuming perfect detection = 0
## Finding the strike detection rate (SDR) that would make your observations plausible ...
## preparing L ~ SDR plot ...
## --- SDR needed for P(Observation) of 0.05 = 0.17
## --- SDR needed for P(Observation) of 0.10 = 0.135
## --- SDR needed for P(Observation) of 0.20 = 0.09
## --- SDR needed for P(Observation) of 0.55 = 0.035

Fig S39. caption

Mitigation measures

Scenarios 3 (rescheduling) & 4 (moratoria)

Figure S40. caption

Figure S41. caption

Comparison of mitigation measures to baseline

Table S23. Mortality rates predicted for fin whales and humpback whales under various mitigation scenarios.
		Fin whales				Humpback whales
			Baseline change				Baseline change
Category	Scenario	Mortalities	2019	2030	2030 (LNG)	Mortalities	2019	2030	2030 (LNG)
Baseline	2019	0.74 (0-2)	0%	-43%	-70%	3.36 (1-7)	0%	-48%	-81%
	2030	1.29 (0-3)	74%	0%	-47%	6.42 (3-11)	91%	0%	-65%
	2030 (LNG)	2.44 (0-5)	230%	89%	0%	18.12 (11-26)	439%	182%	0%
Speed reductions	LNG only	1.99 (0-5)	169%	54%	-18%	13.3 (8-20)	296%	107%	-27%
	All ships < 180m	0.7 (0-2)	-5%	-46%	-71%	6.87 (3-11)	104%	7%	-62%
Daytime-only transits	LNG only	1.99 (0-5)	169%	54%	-18%	13.3 (8-20)	296%	107%	-27%
	All ships < 180m	2.28 (0-5)	208%	77%	-7%	16.41 (10-23)	388%	156%	-9%
LNG rescheduling	One month (Aug)	1.42 (0-4)	92%	10%	-42%	7.42 (3-14)	121%	16%	-59%
	Two months (Jul - Aug)	1.39 (0-4)	88%	8%	-43%	7.31 (3-14)	118%	14%	-60%
	Three months (Jul - Sep)	1.36 (0-4)	84%	5%	-44%	6.89 (3-13)	105%	7%	-62%
LNG moratorium	One month (Aug)	1.41 (0-4)	91%	9%	-42%	7.33 (3-14)	118%	14%	-60%
	Two months (Jul - Aug)	1.37 (0-4)	85%	6%	-44%	7.16 (3-13)	113%	12%	-60%
	Three months (Jul - Sep)	1.34 (0-3)	81%	4%	-45%	6.77 (3-13)	101%	5%	-63%

Figure S42. caption

Discussion

Density estimate comparison throughout region

  # Fin whales (Gitga'at average)
  0.014 / 0.007 # eez (Wright)
## [1] 2
  0.014 / 0.002 # north coast (Wright)
## [1] 7
  0.014 / 0.003 # vancouver island (Nichol)
## [1] 4.666667

  # Fin whales (Squally Ch)
  0.031 / 0.007 # eez
## [1] 4.428571
  0.031 / 0.002 # north coast
## [1] 15.5
  0.031 / 0.003
## [1] 10.33333

  # Humpback whales (Gitga'at average)
  0.079 / 0.016 # eez (Wright)
## [1] 4.9375
  0.079 / 0.025 # north coast (Wright)
## [1] 3.16
  0.079 / 0.014 # vancouver island (Nichol)
## [1] 5.642857

  # Humpback whales (Wright Sound)
  0.0117 / 0.016 # eez
## [1] 0.73125
  0.0117 / 0.025 # north coast
## [1] 0.468
  0.0117 / 0.014
## [1] 0.8357143

Still to add

Tables for humpback whale photogrammetry & track analysis

Supplemental Materials

Eric Keen et al.

8/15/2022